AARP must bridge class, political gaps to save entitlements

AARP was founded more than 50 years ago in the pre-Medicare era to provide affordable health insurance and a positive aging agenda for older Americans. Now the organization is mobilizing its 37 million members for the coming entitlement battle and hopes to occupy its usual preeminent place at the bargaining table. AARP successfully lobbied for Medicare prescription drug coverage (2003), sank George W. Bush’s plans to privatize part of Social Security (2005) and backed the Affordable Care Act (2010).

If Republicans win control of the White House and Congress (and demoralize Democrats), then AARP might well be seniors’ most powerful voice for preserving “Medicare as we know it” – and to resist Wisconsin GOP Rep. Paul Ryan’s bill to privatize future benefits for citizens currently under age 55.

To mobilize and gauge member support for its own entitlement agenda, AARP launched “You’ve Earned a Say,” an online and town hall campaign to educate members about Social Security and Medicare’s fiscal realities and to test tolerance for reform. As part of this mobilization, AARP must rebuild lost trust and lost membership (nearly half a million) in the wake of accusations that it sold out Medicare to the Affordable Care Act. Based on observations at two recent California town halls, building an “age power” consensus must also transcend two key divisions: social class and political ideology. The format was the same in both the heavily Hispanic, working-class eastern L.A. suburb of Pico Rivera and in the predominantly Anglo, upper-middle-class San Diego suburb of Rancho Bernardo. PowerPoint presentations portrayed Medicare and Social Security’s features, funding sources and allocation of expenditures. But both the tone and types of responses at the two gatherings were very different.

In Pico Rivera, only 30 of the anticipated 60 AARP members showed up. They took seats on ancient folding metal chairs in a local high school’s dingy multipurpose room. Approximately two-thirds were women; at least half were Hispanic (three men used devices for simultaneous English-Spanish translation) and most appeared to be working class and over 60. When asked multiple-choice questions about Medicare and Social Security, about half indicated the programs needed only “minor changes” while 27 percent selected “major changes.” About 13 percent felt the programs were “in crisis” and 9 percent felt the programs were “OK as is.” One theme in open-ended discussions was “hands off” the programs. Several participants noted that these “entitlements” had been earned and that the middle class was “disappearing.” There were questions about disability benefits, long-term care issues and grandparents raising children.

Four days later, on May 22, a capacity crowd of 64 AARP members met in the upscale Rancho Bernardo Public Library. A striking 67 percent thought Medicare needed major changes and 22 percent thought the program was “in crisis.” The well-educated, well-dressed, almost all-white members (including many married couples) were more equally divided on whether Social Security needed minor changes or major ones: 42 and 40 percent, respectively. Practically no one thought either program could or would remain “as is.” In contrast to the Pico Rivera gathering, the Rancho Bernardo meeting ran like clockwork. There was lively, detailed discussion of the complexities entitlement present and future funding. There was no discussion of disability policies or of raising grandchildren. There were more conservative voices here; several people strongly articulated their mistrust of government, though a denunciation of “for-profit health care” drew an enthusiastic response. A few thought vouchers or “something else” might be in store for younger generations.

These contrasting town halls pose a strategic dilemma for AARP: “Social justice” concerns favor insulating working-class seniors with minimal entitlement changes – perhaps through means-testing of benefits by income. Meanwhile, upper-middle-class seniors with employer-sponsored pensions and health insurance are more willing to consider major reforms, but might see indexing remedies as unfairly penalizing hard-earned achievement and careful retirement planning. What to do?

AARP initially rallied seniors with the somewhat self-righteous, individualistic slogan, “You’ve Earned It.” A more unifying theme might be found in AARP’s own organizational mantra, coined by its founder Ethel Percy Andrus: “What we do we do for all.” This slogan echoes her Greatest Generation’s spirit of E Pluribus Unum and national community so vital in achieving their proudest policy legacy: Medicare and Social Security. The New Deal and Great Society goals of strong government safety nets are still part of many AARP members’ generational DNA. Re-energizing those more cohesive traditions might moderate members’ differing class and ideological entitlement views – and could appeal to a battle-weary and polarized general electorate.

Lynch, an associate professor of government at Claremont McKenna College, is the author of “One Nation Under AARP: The Fight Over Medicare, Social Security, and America’s Future.”